On Mon, 2018-06-04 at 10:49 -0700, Nadathur, Sundar wrote: > Hi, > > Cyborg needs to create RCs and traits for accelerators. The > original plan was to do that with nested RPs. To avoid rushing > the > Nova developers, I had proposed that Cyborg could start by > applying > the traits to the compute node RP, and accept the resulting > caveats > for Rocky, till we get nested RP support. That proposal did not > find > many takers, and Cyborg has essentially been in waiting mode. > > > > Since it is June already, and there is a risk of not delivering > anything meaningful in Rocky, I am reviving my older proposal, > which > is summarized as below: > > > Cyborg shall create the RCs and traits as per spec > (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/554717/), both in Rocky and > beyond. Only the RPs will change post-Rocky. > > > In Rocky: > > Cyborg will not create nested RPs. It shall apply the device > traits to the compute node RP. > Cyborg will document the resulting caveat, i.e., all devices > in the same host should have the same traits. In > particular, > we cannot have a GPU and a FPGA, or 2 FPGAs of different > types, in the same host. > Cyborg will document that upgrades to post-Rocky releases > will require operator intervention (as described below). > > > > For upgrade to post-Rocky world with nested RPs: > > The operator needs to stop all running instances that use an > accelerator. > The operator needs to run a script that removes the Cyborg > traits and the inventory for Cyborg RCs from compute node > RPs. > The operator can then perform the upgrade. The new Cyborg > agent/driver(s) shall created nested RPs and publish > inventory/traits as specified. > > > IMHO, it is acceptable for Cyborg to do this because it is new > and we can set expectations for the (lack of) upgrade plan. The > alternative is that potentially no meaningful use cases get > addressed in Rocky for Cyborg. > > > > Please LMK what you think.
I thought nested resource providers were already supported by placement? To the best of my knowledge, what is not supported is virt drivers using these to report NUMA topologies but I doubt that affects you. The placement guys will need to weigh in on this as I could be missing something but it sounds like you can start using this functionality right now. Stephen > > > Regards, > > Sundar > > > > _____________________________________________________________________ > _____OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage > questions)Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev- > [email protected]?subject:unsubscribehttp://lists.openstack > .org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
